It's a classic whataboutism distraction attack on the conversation.
whataboutisms aren't bad because they're wrong - they are bad because they are a distraction. Either the commenter is trying to turn the conversation to a different topic they prefer to advocate for, satisfy their ego that they know more, or they are simply attempting to disrupt discourse.
In reality, the focus should be placed on solutions that have the greatest net positive impact. The size of the problems can guide, but some problems are more fundamentally difficult to solve (which makes them useful whataboutisms).
Of course, if we also added the criteria of "We should only debate things on a forum that the members of the forum actually have the ability to effect change on", then 90% of political posts would disappear.
whataboutisms aren't bad because they're wrong - they are bad because they are a distraction. Either the commenter is trying to turn the conversation to a different topic they prefer to advocate for, satisfy their ego that they know more, or they are simply attempting to disrupt discourse.
In reality, the focus should be placed on solutions that have the greatest net positive impact. The size of the problems can guide, but some problems are more fundamentally difficult to solve (which makes them useful whataboutisms).
Of course, if we also added the criteria of "We should only debate things on a forum that the members of the forum actually have the ability to effect change on", then 90% of political posts would disappear.